The Riskification of Internal Auditors' Ethical Deliberation: An Emerging Third Logic Between Norms and Values?

What ethical challenges do internal auditors (IAs) encounter in their professional role, and how do they navigate these hurdles, especially when weaving risks into their ethical judgments? Anchored in philosophical concepts distinguishing norms from values, and the notion that risk is intrinsically moral, this research delves into interviews of 33 Canadian public sector IAs across various government strata. This primary data are enriched by insights from archival documents and an ethics training session attended by 11 internal audit executives. Our analysis reveals two primary ethical challenges faced by IAs-ethical issues and dilemmas-which unfold in the various contexts we explicate in this study. To address them, IAs tend to favor axiological logic (values driven) over deontological logic (norms driven). However, in some situations, a prudential logic centered on risk becomes their touchstone. Our key takeaways are threefold: (1) a highlight of the ethical quandaries IAs grapple with; (2) evidence that prudential logic, with its merits and flaws, is used to bridge the gap that sometimes exists between professional norms and individual values; and (3) an emphasis on the weak reliance of IAs on the Institute of Internal Auditors Code of Ethics, hinting at avenues for its enhanced outreach and pedagogy.

Automated summary

This research examines the ethical challenges faced by internal auditors in their professional role and how they navigate these challenges, finding that they tend to prioritize values-driven logic over norms-driven logic, and sometimes focus on risk. The study also highlights the weak reliance of internal auditors on the Institute of Internal Auditors Code of Ethics.